In another thread everybody couldn't believe that you can hit a relative 1RM week in and week out (and even multiples times during a week) but at GUS we're not the first ones to do this (dunno why I'm relying on anecdotal evidence here but still)... Mike T and his boys at Reactive Training Systems have been doing this forever and Mel Siff has written a little bit of it in Supertraining except he hadn't experimented enough with this at the time.

If you asked me about what the plan for certain lifts is, it will be easier for me to answer....answering a question about my whole routine will really be the longest thing I've ever written.

Saturdays are Deadlift training days. We have a 14 week cycle which is ongoing for this. It's Deadlifts followed by a Deadlift Variation. Weeks 1 and 2 = Snatch Grip DeadliftsWeeks 3 and 4 = Rack DeadliftsWeek 5 = Regular Deadlifts (deload)Weeks 6 and 7 = Deficit DeadliftsWeeks 8 and 9 = Regular DeadliftsWeeks 10 to 13 = Either Snatch Grip Deadlifts or Deficit Deadlifts - I will choose one of the two for this 4 week stretch

So lets get to Deficit Deadlifts (because I just did them), the way it looked was:

There is a lot of leeway for thinking on my feet. For example, with Romanian Deadlifts the guideline is not less than 30 reps (volume). So let us assume that Week 1 I hit 30 reps total. Week 2 I move to 31 reps. Week 3 I increase to 34 and so on till I hit say 40 reps. Then, I cannot increase the reps any more so I go back to a volume of 30 except I take a heavier weight than what I had in Week 1. Therefore, there's an embedded deload and progression right here.

Other exercises like Back squats and Front squats are open ended: I can do singles, doubles or triples so it is up to me on how I feel on that day. There is nothing prescribed. Both these lifts are on maintenance so as long as I am working in the 90%+ of my 1RM range I am good to go.

Not everything has to progress on a weekly basis though...I'm not at that level where I can pull it off unless I intentionally start out with submaximal loads in which case I'm just coasting through everything. So there will be some things which will be literally repeated (and that makes sense because strength cannot go up exponentially) but because SDT is built into most exercises (not all) there are ways to tweak certain things to spur progress: however I always leave some in the tank because whatever progress has to be sustainable so there are very very few instances when I go balls to the wall all the time. Actually, that never happens.

In another thread everybody couldn't believe that you can hit a relative 1RM week in and week out [....] however I always leave some in the tank because whatever progress has to be sustainable so there are very very few instances when I go balls to the wall all the time. Actually, that never happens.

I think, at least for me, some of the confusion/misunderstanding is captured here.

What is a relative 1RM ? I'll listen because I'm sure my guess will be way off ( my guess: An estimated/computed number based on the reps and weight on a given day, with some corrective factor for leaving something in the tank) In that case, I see how you can set a 1RM regularly, almost arbitrarly. I'm still intrigued

I think, at least for me, some of the confusion/misunderstanding is captured here.

What is a relative 1RM ? I'll listen because I'm sure my guess will be way off ( my guess: An estimated/computed number based on the reps and weight on a given day, with some corrective factor for leaving something in the tank) In that case, I see how you can set a 1RM regularly, almost arbitrarly. I'm still intrigued

This is a Relative 1RM (and it is not at all what you just wrote - it is not estimated or computed):

Eric Troy wrote:

For those who do not compete, there are two kinds of maximums that are useful. One is your PR, or your best max for the last few months and the other is your relative max.

The PR is useful more in psychological ways than for training. Going all out for a test lift, for one, is damn fun! It is beyond me why anyone would want to work their butt off training for strength and then "not be allowed" to attempt a PR unless they are a competitor. Where is the intrinsic value in training for a goal you never reach? That is bogus, I think you'll agree, if your goal is maximum strength. There is no pride in a 1RM guesstimate. The PR or best test also gives you something to shoot far. The idea is, I did it once I can do it again, only better. Better would be, hopefully, with less deviation from the standards of good form. Perhaps with better amplitude, coordination, speed, etc. The best feeling is when a PR becomes a benchmark that you can do any day of the week. Many lifters hold this in their mind and can readily remember the time they struggled to do a weight that they now own at any time. This gives one a true feeling of progress.

The relative max is what we use for training. To understand the relative max you have to understand what "good performance" is. Most general strength training programs see performance as either weight on the bar or adding weight on the bar. This isn't a true measure of performance, of course, but only one aspect of it. So while you may get a great new PR, your performance, relative to your ability to lift a weight with excellent performance, may be poor. For a PR, we don't care as long as we have the experience to do it without getting hurt, and this comes with a lot of exposure and "body knowledge" as much as anything else.

So the relative max, if I can actually explain it, is a max based on a benchmark that represents preparedness that does not fluctuate greatly over the short term. That is, it is based on a range of ability that is within the "fitness norm" for you. This allows one to train closer to their maximum ability at any given time. The relative max requires much higher standards of performance than the PR attempt. We do it with good form, with little to no cheating or compensatory movement. Although I brought up the word excellent in regards to the PR explanation, it is not necessary to go for "excellence" in a relative max attempt. It is, after all, a max. It is a slow and demanding lift if you are not an Olympic lifter, for which the technical needs can mean there is very little divide between excellent technique and success.

The other side of the performance coin is that it is very difficult to make a trainee understand what a good relative max is if they've never really gone for it and attempted that big PR. Those "competition" days become useful in another sense. They teach you to recognize the difference between going all out and performing a more controlled relative max. Here we have again, the concept of references or benchmarks. The PR becomes a kind of performance benchmark for our general training. For instance, while you may allow the lower back to approach very close to end range of motion during the PR attempt, during a relative max you would be careful not to skirt that close to end range of motion. During a bench press PR you might let the back rise up a bit into an exaggerated arch whereas in a relative max you will try to stay pinned to the bench.

Your relative max is the most you can lift on that day while maintaining acceptable form - like Eric has written "acceptable" is loose because it is after all a heavy weight not something you can dance around with.

Thanks. I think I'm understanding a bit more. I hope you don't mind me continuing to ask questions. I won't ask any more now until I've had a chance to read the links you posted, and maybe look around the GUS site a bit more. Maybe I'll find my answers before I ask!

_________________Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

Thanks. I think I'm understanding a bit more. I hope you don't mind me continuing to ask questions. I won't ask any more now until I've had a chance to read the links you posted, and maybe look around the GUS site a bit more. Maybe I'll find my answers before I ask!

So, yeah, I read those links and a bunch more on the GUS site. Very thought-provoking. They answered a log of my questions, but generated a lot more. Could you point me to some articles on GUS's approach to programming? Then later I'll ask more specifically.

Is GUS just the web site? Or is it also physical gym?

Is Eric the site owner of the GUS site? Is he the primary brains behind it (I see articles by others, including you and including some nationally-known writers)? Other than ads, I don't see anything on the site that would be income-generating for him, so it appears that the site exists primarily to help people, not to make money. I'm always suspicious at first, but I don't see any books or DVDs for sale, fee-for-service distance coaching, etc. Not that there's anything wrong with any of those things. In that way, GUS is similar to ExRx. Anyway, so far it looks like a great site, and Eric's articles are very good.

_________________Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum